Summary
h is study was conducted in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 growing periods. Our local cultivar “Osmanlı”, European and American cultivars: “Camarosa”, “Sweet Charlie”, “Gaviota”, “Maya”, “Paros”, “Cilady”, “Cigoulette”, “Marlate”, “Sophie”, “Ciloe”, “Diamante” and “Camarosa” , hybrids from Italian breeding program: “92/340/3”, “MT/j24/2”, “MT99/20/1”, “MT99/121/9”, “MT99/163/14”, “MT99/163/19”and “MT99/163/22”, and hybrids from Turkish breeding
program: “3”, “5”, “6”, “8”, “11”, “13” and “17” were used as plant material. Average yield per plant (g/plant), fruit weight (g) and some phenological plant characteristics such as plant growth shape, plant density, plant vigour, leaf size, leaf sot ness, beginning of l owering time and response to Fe chlorosis of experimental strawberry genotypes were evaluated. Hybrids MT J24/2 and MT 99/163/22 were found to be very satisfactory in terms of average yield/plant, and fruit weight respectively.
Key words
strawberry, yield, fruit weight, adaptation, Fe chlorosis
Investigation on Yield, Fruit Quality
and Plant Characteristics of Some Local,
European and American Strawberry
Varieties and their Hybrids
Müge ÖZUYGUR
1Sevgi PAYDAŞ KARGI
1( )Ebru KAFKAS
21 University of Cukurova, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture,
01330, Balcalı, Adana, Türkiye e-mail: [email protected]
2 University of Cukurova, Subtropical Fruits Research and Application Center,
01330 Balcalı, Adana Türkiye
Introduction
Strawberries (Fragaria x ananassa Duch.) are unique, with highly desirable taste, l avour, rich in vitamins, potassium, i ber and other secondary metabolites, also simple sugar source of energy, consumed as fresh table fruit or used in processing industry for jam and mar-malades or frozen (Wang and Galletta, 2002; Perez et al., 1997).
Strawberries are grown throughout the world. Although the yield/plant, size and colour of the common cultivars obtained in California are quite satisfactory, the local cultivars or types are in very big demand for their aroma and l avour (Üstün, 1996). h e new octa-ploid strawberry cultivars are high yielding and early fruiting, but poor in aroma constituents.
Numerous breeding programs aimed at improv-ing strawberry taste were done accordimprov-ing to demand (Hancock, 1999). h e main aspects of those breeding pro-grams were three major components of fruit organolep-tic quality: l avour, sweetness, and acidity. Consumers prefer sweet strawberries and sweetness is positively correlated with soluble solid contents (SSC), total solu-ble sugars, and fructose (Shaw, 1990). Many studies have addressed strawberry sweetness and acidity. Fruit solu-ble solids, titratasolu-ble acidity, and organic acids at matu-rity are quantitatively inherited (Shaw, 1997) Consumer preference is important in determining the value of new cultivars. For this purpose, a strawberry breeding program was initiated at the University of Çukurova, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture in 1984 (Paydaş et al., 1996). In our country mostly farm-ers grow “Camarosa” due to yield, large fruits, and l esh i rmness that is highly desirable. But it is always condemn by the consumers due to of l avour and taste. Our local cultivar Osmanli is very rich in aroma and taste whereas its average fruit size is very small (roughly 5-8 g), l esh i rmness is highly undesirable due to its sot ness that renders it unsuitable for transportation. For these rea-sons we aim to develop more aromatic and tasty straw-berry genotypes in our country. h is breeding program has the major objective to develop new strawberry vari-eties especially well adapted and able to provide a high productive and qualitative standard.
In this paper, we aimed to evaluate adaptation per-formance especially average yield/plant, fruit weight and some phenological plant characteristics such as plant growth shape, plant density, plant vigour, leaf size, leaf sot ness, begining of l owering time and responce to Fe chlorosis of our local cultivar, promising hybrids from our and Italian breeding programs and some American and European cultivars.
Materials and methods
h is study was conducted in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 growing periods in Experimental and Implementation Research Area and Laboratories of Horticulture Department in Faculty of Agriculture, University of Cukurova in Mediterranean region of Turkey. In the experiment, our local cultivar “Osmanlı”, American and European cultivars “Camarosa”, “Sweet Charlie”, “Gaviota”, “Maya”, “Paros”, “Cilady”, “Cigoulette”, “Marlate”, “Sophie”, “Ciloe”, “Diamante” and “Camarosa”, hybrids from Italian breeding program: “92/340/3”, “MT/ j24/2”, “MT99/20/1”, “MT99/121/9”, “MT99/163/14”, “MT99/163/19” and “MT99/163/22” and hybrids from Turkish breeding program: “3”, “5”, “6”, “8”, “11”, “13” and “17” were used as plant material. h e experiment was designed as a complete randomized block with three replicate; Twenty plants were used in each replicate. Black plastic mulch and drip fertigation system were applied. Average yield per plant (g/plant), fruit weight (g) and some phenological observations such as growth shape, plant density, plant vigour, leaf size, leaf sot ness, begin-ning of l owering time and response to Fe chlorosis of those strawberry genotypes in the i eld were examined. Phenological characters were done using modii ed de-scriptors of Faedi et al.(2002), and Paydaş et al. (1996).
Results and discussion
Genotypes Months Total
March April May June
3 59.4 c-g 143.3 abc 55.0 ghi 7.7 i 265.5 f-j
5 37.2 e-h 117.1 b-e 36.6 i 17.9 hi 208.8 hij
6 55.6 c-h 180.6 a 139.3 c 74.5 c-h 449.9 bc
8 47.5 d-h 105.7 b-f 108.0 c-f 26.1 ghi 287.4 d-i
11 39.2 e-h 92.1 b-g 69.1 f-i 43.7 e-i 244.2 g-j
12 62.3 c-g 133.8 a-d 60.3 f-i 26.4 ghi 282.7 e-i
13 20.2 gh 110.1 b-f 40.7 hi - 171.0 jk
17 10.2 h 102.3 b-f 82.9 d-i - 195.4 ij
92/340/3 39.0 e-h 77.8 dg 95.5 c-g 137.1 ab 349.4 def
Osmanlı - 34.6 g 42.2 hi 16.8 hi 93.6 k
Camarosa 34.0 e-h 114.6 b-f 86.0 d-h 83.5 b-g 317.9 d-g
Sweet Charlie 66.0 b-f 78. 9 d-g 105.8 c-f 55.1 d-i 305.8 d-h
Marlate 33.3 e-h 108.4 b-f 125.2 cd 2.2 i 269.2 f-i
Cilady 36.2 e-h 64.3 efg 60.8 f-i 52.1 e-i 213.4 hij
Gaviota 32.6 fgh 64.7 efg 88.1 d-h 87.9 b-f 273.4 f-i
Cigoulette 23.1 fgh 88.3 c-g 108.0 c-f 76.6 c-g 296.0 d-h
Ciloe 21.0 fgh 152. 5 ab 105.9 c-f 96.1 b-e 375.4 cde
Paros 49.3 d-h 86.6 c-g 93.4 c-g 109.9 bcd 339.2 d-g
Maya 33.6 e-h 106.8 b-f 75.0 e-i 36.4 f-i 251.9 g-j
MT 99/121/9 78.2 a-e 65.8 efg 118.6 cde 118.6 bc 380.6 cd
MT J24/2 110.1 ab 193.4 a 187.4 b 84.8 b-f 575.7 α
MT 99/163/14 96.9 abc 52.6 fg 81.5 d-i 89.1 b-f 320.1 d-g
MT 99/163/19 61.9 c-g 72. 7 d-g 243.8 a 115.4 bc 493.7 ab
MT 99/20/1 90.6 a-d 91.5 b-g 96.4 c-g 50.9 e-i 329.4 d-g
MT 99/163/22 114.0 a 103.6 b-f 128.0 cd 178.8 a 524.4 ab
D % 5 44.9 62.9 47.9 57.8 97.482
Genotypes Months Total
February March April May June
3 8.6 b 57.8 cde 38.3 c.f 13.9 g 26.6 d-g 145.2 hij
5 3.6 b 44.5 ef 53.0 bcd 47.6 bcd 29.2 def 178.0 e-h
6 6.2 b 82.9 a-d 43.4 c.f 10.7 g 41.6 bcd 184.8 d-g
8 28.2 a 61.4 b-e 55.9 bcd 43.7 cd 32.2 cde 221.5 bc
11 2.1 b 94.8 a 83.3 a 36.4 de 32.6 cde 249.2 ab
12 5.4 b 55.9 de 74.4 ab 50.3 bcd 22.5 e-g 208.6 cde
13 2.4 b 66.8 b-e 32.5 def 70. 7 a 23.7 e-h 196.1 c-f
17 10.4 b 85.6 abc 53.0 bcd 59.3 abc 6.2 i 214.5 cd
92/340/3 - 15.7 gh 40.5 c-f 65.1 ab 16.0 f-i 137.3 ijk
Osmanlı - - 38.6 c-f 35.2 def 22.9 e-h 96.7 lm
Camarosa 5.0 b 87.4 ab 44.4 c-f 12.7 g 24.4 e-h 174.0 fgh
S. Charlie 9.2 b 64.7 b-e 23.5 ef 12.9 g 153.0 a 263.2 a
Marlate 2.8 b 10.1 h 19.0 f 50.6 bcd 12.3 ghi 94.7 lm
Cilady - 41.8 efg 48.6 b-e 62.5 abc 47.4 bc 200.2 c-f
Gaviota 6.4 b 23.8 fgh 20.2 f 51.3 bcd 13. 8 f-i 115.5 jkl
Cigoulette 4.4 b 11.0 h 90.3 a 19.6 efg 34.1 cde 159.3 ghi
Ciloe - - 64.3 abc 37.1 de 54.7 b 156.1 ghi
Paros 32.3 a 100.2 a 35.5 def 10.5 g 18.9 e-i 197.4 c-f
Sophie - - 19.6 f 60.0 abc - 79.6 m
Maya 12.7 b 45.6 ef 17. 4 f 16.9 fg 21.6 e.i 114.2 j-m
Diamante - 20.3 fgh 30.8 def 46.0 cd 9.0 hi 106.1 klm
D%5 11.7 27.9 27.1 18.8 15.7 34.6
Table 1.
Average yield of experimental genotypes during 2003-2004 growing period (g/plant)
Table 2.
Genotypes Months Average
March April May June
3 8.79 de 10.24 de 7.39 gh 7.73 abc 8.54 hi
5 10.19 cde 10.52 de 7.69 fgh 9.06 ab 9.36 f-i
6 14.44 a-e 12.60 b-e 9.73 c-g 8.03 ab 11.20 c-i
8 14.76 a-d 13.17 b-e 10.40 b-g 9.72 a 12.02 b.h
11 10.07 cde 9.20 ef 9.14 c-g 7.77 abc 9.05 ghi
12 7.70 e 9.31 ef 8.18 e-h 8.68 ab 8.47 i
13 9.16 de 11.09 cde 8.47 d-h - 9.57 e-i
17 12.39 b-e 14.09 b-e 9.30 c-g - 11.92 b-i
92/340/3 13.82 b-e 14.13 b-e 17.32 a 10.81 a 14.02 abc
Osmanlı - 4.07 f 3.92 h 3.74 c 3.91 j
Camarosa 12.87 b-e 14.36 a-e 12.26 b-f 8.57 ab 12.02 b-h
Sweet Charlie 10.79 b-e 11.12 cde 11.03 b-g 8.43 ab 10.34 d-i
Marlate 9.35 de 11.30 cde 10.55 b-g 5.50 bc 9.18 ghi
Cilady 11.86 b-e 9.21 ef 11.84 b-g 9.49 ab 10.60 c-i
Gaviota 17.30 ab 13.68 b-e 11.65 b-g 8.64 ab 12.82 a-f
Cigoulette 14.09 b-e 14.41 a-e 11.53 b-g 9.87 a 12.48 a-g
Ciloe 12.02 b-e 13.84 b-e 11.75 b-g 9.84 a 11.87 b-i
Paros 17.43 ab 14.83 a-d 11.23 b-g 8.77 ab 13.06 a-e
Maya 9.64 de 11.20 cde 10.06 b-g 9.07 ab 9.99 e-i
MT 99/121/9 14.41 a-e 11.61 cde 10.22 b-g 9.52 ab 11.44 b-i
MT J24/2 17.11 ab 19.46 a 12.53 b-e 10.69 a 14.95 ab
MT 99/163/14 16.39 abc 13.51 b-e 14.73 ab 9.69 ab 13.58 a-d
MT 99/163/19 13.14 b-e 16.13 abc 13.21 a-d 9.70 ab 13.04 a-e
MT 99/20/1 14.75 a-d 9.71 de 11.86 b-g 8.84 ab 11.29 c-i
MT 99/163/22 21.08 a 17.49 ab 13.69 abc 10.72 a 15.75 a
D % 5 6.741 5.309 4.745 4.217 3.578
Genotypes Months Average
March April May June
3 5.36 g 5.00 ijk 6.33 efg 4.22 gh 5.23 jk
5 4.93 g 5.14 ijk 7.66 d-g 4.31 gh 5.51 ijk
6 7.85 d-g 6.13 f-j 9.54 a-d 5.99 c-g 7.38 e-h
8 8.54 c-g 8.68 b-g 8.08 c-f 4.90 e-h 7.55 d-g
11 9.71 c-f 5.75 g-k 6.36 efg 4.52 fgh 6.59 g-j
12 4.86 g 5.40 h-k 5.31 fg 3.97 h 4.89 k
13 7.05 efg 5.57 h-k 7.84 def 6.96 bcd 6.85 f-j
17 10.86 cde 9.20 b-e 8.38 b-e 5.42 c-h 8.46 c-f
92/340/3 15.77 a 17.34 a 10.85 abc 8.00 ab 12.99 a
Osmanlı - 2.92 k 1.56 h 1.46 i 1.98 l
Camarosa 12.16 abc 8.37 c-h 8.92 a-e 4.85 e-h 8.58 cde
S. Charlie 8.53 c.g 4.80 jk 6.45 efg 7.12 bc 6.73 g-j
Marlate 6.71 fg 4.86 ijk 11.24 a 5.03 d-h 6.96 e-i
Cilady 11.15 cd 9.42 bcd 11.12 ab 9.64 a 10.33 b
Gaviota 12.19 abc 9.82 bc 8.94 a-e 6.44 b-f 9.35 bc
Cigoulette 11.63 bcd 7.87 c-i 6.81 d-g 5.16 c-h 7.87 c-g
Ciloe - 8.87 b-f 9.25 a-d 5.86 c-h 7.99 c-g
Paros 15.48 ab 6.67 d-j 8.24 cde 6.74 b-e 9.28 bc
Sophie - 6.24 e-j 4.90 g - 5.57 ijk
Maya 8.08 d.g 5.13 ijk 6.33 efg 3.96 h 5.88 h-k
Diamante 12.20 abc 11.55 b 7.08 d-g 5.96 c-g 9.20 bcd
D % 5 3.891 3.028 2.790 1.965 1.656
Table 3.
Average fruit weight of experimental genotypes during 2003-2004 growing period (g/plant)
Table 4.
Cilady was found to be very close to “Sweet Charlie”. In terms of this trait, Itailan hybrid number 92/340/3 was shown to be intermediate.
Average yield per plant per month and total yield per plant for genotypes in the experiment during the 2004-2005 growing period are given in Table 2. h e dif erences among the experimental genotypes in terms of average yield/plant/months and total yield/plant were found to be statistically signii cant and the lowest yield was obtained in March. In this month, the highest yield was obtained from hybrid number MT 99/163/22 (114.01 g) and the lowest yield/plant was obtained from hybrid number 17 (10.21 g) while no fruits were harvested from Osmanlı. h e highest yield was obtained in April, almost from all genotypes. In this month yield/plant varied from 34.60 g (“Osmanlı”) 193.38 g (“MT J24/2”). In May the lowest yield/plant was from hybrid number 5 (36.58 g) whereas the highest yield/plant was obtained from MT 99/163/19 (243.77 g). In June no fruits were harvested from hy-brids 13 and 17; whereas in this month the yield/plant increased in some genotypes such as hybrids 92/340/3, MT 99/163/14, and MT 99/163/22 and cultivar Paros. According to the obtained data the highest yield was ob-tained from hybrid number MT J24/2 (575.70 g) where-as the lowest yield wwhere-as obtained from cultivar Osmanlı (93.65 g). Turkish hybrid 6 was found to be very close to our hybrids and among the European cultivars culti-var Ciloe (375.37g) was found to be very close to hybrid number MT J24/2.
Similar results were obtained in terms of yield/plant of cultivar Camarosa and cultivar Osmanlı with Çağlar and Paydaş (2002) and Kak as (2004). However, Kak as (2004) reported that the results of yield/plant of hybrids (3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12 and 13) were found to be higher than these experimental results. h e reason for this may be due to the dif erences in climatic conditions of experi-mental years. Due to the fact that Kak as studied the yield and other characteristics during 2001-2002 grow-ing period and in this period the winter was very mild in comparison to the our growing period. In addition, in this study we planted the fresh runner plants of ex-perimental genotypes approximately one month later then Kak as (2004).
h e average fruit weight of experimental genotypes and distribution according to the months are given in Table 3. As shown in Table 3 the average fruit weight was varied from 4.86 g (hybrid 12) to 15.77 g (92/340/3) in March. In the following month these values varied from 2.92 g (Osmanlı) to 17.34 g (92/340/3). In May, av-erage fruit weight increased almost in all genotypes in comparison to April. In June, the average fruit weight of experimental genotypes decreased in comparison
to the previous month. As a result, the highest average fruit weight was obtained from hybrid 92/340/3 (12.99 g) whereas the lowest value was obtained from cultivar Osmanlı.
Average fruit weight of experimental genotypes and distribution according to the months during 2004-2005 growing period are given in Table 4. h e dif erences among the genotypes were found to be statistically signii -cant in all months. In March, average fruit weight varied from 4.86 g (hybrid number 12) to 15.77 g (92/340/3). h e fruits of hybrid number 17 and cultivar Paros were found to be very close to 92/340/3. Average fruit weight of experimental genotypes were decreased in hybrid numbers 3, 6, 11, 13, 17 and cultivars Camarosa, Sweet Charlie, Marlate, Cilady, Gaviota, Cigoulette, Paros, Maya and Diamante while increased in others. Average fruit weight was increased in May almost for all geno-types whereas in July decreased. h e highest average fruit weight of experimental genotypes was obtained from hybrid number 92/340/3 (12.99 g) while the lowest one was detected as cultivar Osmanlı. Ilgın et al., (2002) reported similar results in terms of average fruit weight for cultivar Sweet Charlie. Our results were found to be lower than that of Kak as (2004) in terms of average fruit weight of hybrids 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 17.
Genotypes Growth shape Plant density Plant vigour Leaf size Leaf softness Beg.of flow. time
Responce to Fe chlor.
3 erect dense medium medium harsh early susceptible
5 erect dense med.strength medium medium medium susceptible
6 medium dense med.strength large harsh medium high. resis
8 erect dense strength large harsh v. early medium
11 medium dense strength large medium early medium
12 medium dense med.strength large medium medium medium
13 erect dense strength large medium early resistance
17 erect medium strength large harsh early susceptible
92/340/13 droop.ground open strength medium medium medium resistance
Osmanlı droop.ground High.dense med.strength small harsh late resistance
Camarosa erect medium med.strength large medium medium high suscep.
S.Charlie medium medium med.strength medium medium early resistance
Marlate erect medium strength large medium early resistance
Cilady droop.ground medium med. strength medium harsh late high. resist.
Gaviota erect medium strength large harsh medium resistance
Cigoulette medium medium med. strength medium harsh late resistance
Ciloe erect medium strength large harsh late resistance
Paros erect dense strength large harsh medium resistance
Sophie droop.ground open weak medium harsh medium resistance
Maya medium open medium medium medium early resistance
Diamante erect open weak medium harsh medium resistance
MT 99/121/9 erect dense strength large soft early high. resist.
MT J24/2 erect medium strength large medium late high. resist.
MT 99/163/14 erect dense strength large harsh early resistance
MT 99/163/19 erect medium strength medium medium medium medium
MT 99/20/1 medium dense strength medium medium early resistance
MT 99/163/22 erect medium strength large harsh early resistance
Conclusion
In this paper, performance of our local, European and American cultivars and cultivar candidates from our and Italian breeding programmes were compared. As a result, hybrids MT J24/2 and MT 99/163/22 were found to be very satisfactory in average yield/plant and fruit weight, respectively. Hybrid number 8 from our breeding program was observed the earliest one, while MT J24/2 from Italian breeding program the latest one. Cultivar Cilady and hybrids 6, MT 99/121/9 and MT J24/2 were observed as the ones with highest resistance to chlorosis which caused Fe dei ciency.
References
Çağlar H. and Paydaş S., 2002. Changes of quality characteristics and aroma compounds of hybrids and some strawberry cultivars during harvests period. Proc. 4th Int. Strawberry Symp. Eds. Hietaranta, M. M. Lina, P. Palonen and P. Parikka. Acta Hort. 567. ISHS 2002. 203-206.
Faedi W., Aruzzi G., Lovati F., Sbrighi P., and Luchhi P., 2002. P. Arcuti (Editor). Monogari a di cultivar di fragola, Progetto i nalizzatto MİPAF, Roma, 291 s. Hancock, J. F., 1999. Strawberries. Crop production science
in horticulture. University Press, Cambridge pp 237.
Kak as E. 2004. Bazı Çilek Genotiplerinde Aroma Bileşiklerinin Tayini Ve Aroma Bileşikleri İle Bazı Meyve Kalite Kriterleri Arasındaki İlişkiler, PhD. h esis. Ilgın M., Kaşka N. and Çolak A. 2002. Yield and quality
performances of some strawberry hybrids and cultivars grown in K.Maraş, Turkey. Proc. 4th Int. Strawberry Symp. Eds. T. Hietaranta et al. Acta Hort. 567, ISHS 2002. Vol:I, 195-197p.
Paydaş S. Kaşka N. & Ağar I. T., 1996. Studies on strawberry crossings between Turkish and American or European cultivars. Gartenbauwissenschat , 61, 96-102.
Pérez A. G., Olías R., Espada J., Olías J. M. and Sanz C.,1997. Rapid determination of sugars, nonvolatile acids, and ascorbic acid in strawberry and other fruits. J. Agric. Food Chem. 45, 3545-3549.
Shaw D.V., 1990. Response in selection and associated changes in genetic variance for soluble solids and titratable acid contents in strawberries. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 115, 839-843.
Shaw D. V., 1987. Genotypic variation and genotypic correlation for sugars and organic acids of strawberries. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 113, 770-774.
Üstün P., 1996. Bazi Melez Cilek ve Cesit Adaylarinin Verim ve Meyve Kalitesi Üzerinde Arastirmalar. Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
Wang S.Y. and Galletta G. J., 2002. Compositional change in
Colletotrichum (Anthracnose) infected strawberry fruit.
Table 5.
Some plant characteristics of experimental strawberry genotypes
ac
s7
1_
